Western Sydney on the move

Daryl Melham is the Labor member for the western Sydney seat of Banks and has been for 23 years.

A former Shadow Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, he is Chair of the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters and until 9 October last year was caucus chairman.

His surprise resignation from that position caused ripples in the media for an hour or so (was there a connection with Kevin Rudd’s leadership ambitions?) before being steamrolled by developments in the Peter Slipper saga, culminating later that day in Julia Gillard’s famous “misogyny speech”.

Banks is one of western Sydney’s most marginal Labor seats. It sits next to Hughes, which has been held by the Liberals since 1996, and also Cook, that solid middle-class Liberal electorate.

Daryl came close to losing his seat in 2010. An 8.9 per cent swing to the Liberal Party saw his margin reduced to 1.5 per cent.

NSW ex-premier Morris Iemma has claimed that former apparatchiks Karl Bitar and Mark Arbib tried to tip Melham out of Banks before the last election and that had they done so the absence of his personal vote would have seen the seat (and hence, government) go to the Liberals.

Due to a redistribution, Melham was sitting MP for only about 60 per cent (voter-wise) of Banks in 2010, and so for his personal vote to have made a difference it would have to be worth at least 2.5 per cent (1.5 divided by 0.6) compared with a totally new Labor candidate.

It’s reasonable to believe it is worth that, but from available data Melham does not have the highest personal vote around.

The 2009 federal redistribution in NSW had a particular impact on western Sydney and saw many sitting members contest large slabs of territory containing new voters. (In a couple of cases MPs ran in totally different seats).

This table shows 2010 swings in all portions of seats that were part of Banks in 2010 or 2007, as well as other portions of those seats.

Click any image for larger popup.
The second-last column describes the personal vote changes, if any, at the 2010 election, and the last column gives them a value. If the change should help the ALP it’s +1, if it helps the Liberals it’s -1 and if no change then zero.

The table is sorted in descending order of swing to the Liberals, and if the swings conformed to these personal vote effects we would expect the -1s to be at the top, zeros in the middle and +1s at the bottom.

That is roughly what we get.

(Of course, in the real world not all booths will swing by the same amount net of personal vote effects. There is evidence, for example, that migrants swung particularly big.)

The above table suggests Tony Burke in Watson has a high personal vote.

This is supported by the table below, which ranks 2010 sitting NSW Labor MPs by House of Representative primary vote minus Senate primary vote, adjusted for redistributions.

Burke is at the top, Melham about two-thirds down.
This graph below has Labor two-party-preferred votes in Banks, NSW and Australia at federal elections since 1984. It is adjusted backwards for redistributions.
See how the gap between seat and state has been gradually narrowing.

This below graph shows just that gap, which has shrunk by 7 per cent in 26 years.
This is the equivalent graph for the whole of western Sydney. (It includes Banks, Barton, Blaxland, Chifley, Fowler, Grayndler, Greenway, Hughes, Lindsay, Lowe, Macarthur, Macquarie, McMahon, Parramatta, Reid, Watson and Werriwa. I concede Macquarie’s inclusion perhaps a bit iffy over the whole period.)
The difference for the group as a whole is 3 per cent.

The last election was characterised by big swings in Sydney to the Liberals and a less movement, in fact to the ALP in some seats, in the rest of the state. Some of this will correct.

But western Sydney has over the decades become more Liberal-voting. No, it’s not John Howard’s doing, nor Tony Abbott’s. It is to do with increasing affluence, de-unionisation, a general weakening of partisanship on both sides (which has also seen former Coalition seats move towards the ALP).

But the electoral world doesn’t revolve around Sydney’s west, no matter what folks in Sussex Street, and in some of the media, seem to think.

Part of the problem with Labor’s 2010 election campaign was its obsession with that part of the world, the belief that electoral support begins there and overflows to the rest of the nation.

Your Comments

The point being?
Alp ignore other seats swings (States) at their peril.?
Libs should not expect this in the rest of Australia.?
Clarification for this dummy! Please.

Peter BrentWed 16 Jan 13 (01:15pm)

Yes, your first answer.

G. W. SmithWed 16 Jan 13 (01:01pm)

I would like you to speculate (heaven forbid!) on a hypothetical, Mumbles, stemming from this claim:

“It is to do with increasing affluence, de-unionisation, a general weakening of partisanship on both sides (which has also seen former Coalition seats become move [sic] towards the ALP).”

With this ostensible narrowing (perhaps, at present, it is one-sided) of partisanship, what would the effect be of A) non-compulsory voting, B) voluntary prefencing, and C) both A) and B) combined. If voters are becoming less wedded to one particular party (again, this may be one-sided at present!), would the de-shackling, so to speak, of the electorate, result in more erractic swings between the parties and/or toward minor parties and independents?

Peter BrentWed 16 Jan 13 (01:19pm)

I think it helps explain the big recent state results (in both directions - a decade ago there were record Labor wins) and federally extreme opinion poll numbers (that haven’t yet been reflected at the ballot box). You first questions, however, are too tricky to address here. Can I write a book about it and get back to you?

DBWed 16 Jan 13 (01:07pm)

In my opinion the Liberal Party has made a bad mistake here by not running the high profile and Tony Abbott supported Ron Delezio, who will now be the Liberal candidate for Watson (running against Environment Minister, Tony Burke). It could affect the Liberals chances of picking up the seat of Banks. Delezio ran as a pre-selection candidate for Banks, however, was defeated by David Coleman who is or was a Nine Entertainment Director, and is supported in the Liberal Party by the likes of Malcolm Turnbull and Scott Morrison. Coleman, if successful, is touted as being a probable Assistant Minister or Parliamentary Secretary in an Abbott Government. Coleman is believed to be highly capable.

The Liberals can still pick up Banks (in which I originally thought was a certainty if Delezio ran), but it won’t be first to fall in western Sydney, should seats fall to the Liberal Party there.

Daryl Melham has close community connections through his affilliation with the Revesby Workers Club. Interestingly, about half of Revesby and nearby Panania (in which about 20% of the Revesby Workers Club membership is based) was lost in the 2009 redistribution to the seat of Hughes, so quite a bit of his personal support went with the redistribution.

If Labor lose Banks, they cannot win the election in my opinion. I know Peter is not of that belief, but if Banks goes, so do a few others in western Sydney before it. From there, I can’t see how Gillard’s Government can retain power.

Peter BrentWed 16 Jan 13 (01:21pm)

Interesting. I agree DB that if Labor goes backwards in that neck of the woods it will be part of a (large) loss nationwide.

sabenaWed 16 Jan 13 (01:07pm)

I don’t know who drew up the 2010 personal vote table,but the methadology strains credibility.How can you have a personal vote of 5.7%(Maxine McKew) and lose your seat?

Peter BrentWed 16 Jan 13 (01:22pm)

I should have explained more clearly: it’s relative personal vote. I’ll change the wording. (Personal vote won’t save someone when the swing is on.)

GeoffWed 16 Jan 13 (01:50pm)

Labor cannot ignore any seat. While western Sydney is a huge problem for them, ANY seat lost is a disaster. Labor will likely lose support from Oakeshott and Windsor, Bandt may go, Wilkie if he retains will be an unhappy companion for Labor. WA seems to be going through the NSW and QLD Labor brand malaise but starting from a point further down the anti Labor path.
Gillard, unions and the Craig type issues are just lead in the saddlebag that Labor can do nothing about.
Labor in this election year is looking at doom and trying to find some sunshine somewhere in the electorate. Same with the Greens. The Coalition is looking mostly at sunshine with possibly some doom lurking in Victoria.
I think the last NewsPoll was another rogue because the same day Essential maintained its unchanged 2PP.
We will know from polling after Parliament returns.
I believe Labor faces death by many many cuts across most of its seats. There is very little upside. The economy is not going to be their electoral friend nor will the asylum seekers. Debt and funding of Labor values policies will feed back to economy problems for them. I think the Coalition needs to keep a low profile and let Labor’s problems steadily campaign for them.
....not sure if I went off topic

kmeWed 16 Jan 13 (01:50pm)

But western Sydney has over the decades become more Liberal-voting.

Hmm. If you take out the most recent data point, from 2010, then it doesn’t look like you can reject the null hypothesis, that it hasn’t moved at all. Perhaps 2010 was just an outlier, and Western Sydney hasn’t really changed the way it votes at all?

DBWed 16 Jan 13 (02:00pm)

G. W. Smith
Wed 16 Jan 13 (01:01pm)

Voluntary voting would certainly assist the Liberal Party is seats such as Banks, at least initially.

.....

Also I agree with Abbott’s general view, in that if Delezio (in particular) had the proper support needed to man all booths in 2010, the Liberals could have won this seat. To my knowledge at least one booth (a very large one in Narwee) was unmanned by the Liberal Party for the whole of the election day. I suspect there were other nearby booths as well. This failure won’t happen next time. Yet, in my seat (Warringah), when I went to vote, there were 4 people handing out how to vote Liberal pamphelets. Go figure....

The ALP do this sort of stuff better than the Liberal Party at present in my opinion. If the Liberals pick up their act (and they should be able to given the recent State election win), the ALP will find it harder than the past, all things being equal.

Lindsay.Wed 16 Jan 13 (02:11pm)

Bits of Banks are very wealthy. Other bits are far from wealthy. Some sections have gained wealth over the past 40 decades, others areas have never seen it. However I do not expect wealth to decide who will vote for which party.
I would suggest it would be hard to expect voters to vote in 2013 as they did in the last election. Much has changed and Gillard is expected to run a far better campaign this year.

DBWed 16 Jan 13 (02:18pm)

kme
Wed 16 Jan 13 (01:50pm)

Can’t say for western Sydney generally, however, in Banks Peter is correct. Except for 2007 (Howard Government loss) the two lines (i.e. Banks and NSW) have been gradually converging.

The reason for this in Banks is certainly due to the old people moving out, and the young families who are more aspirational, moving in. These younger people are not necessarily Liberal voters, but a good portion of them would be swinging voters or more likely to vote Liberal, which makes a seat such as this more marginal. It’s my personal view, but I believe a lot of these people probably are more empathetic to Abbott’s cause (i.e. religious, family man, aspirational) than Gillard’s compared to the average of the population.

It is remarkable just how many old fibro houses have been knocked down and are being replaced with new brick homes in the last decade in this area. I believe this is a good reflection of the gradual but ongoing relative shift to the Liberals in seats such as this.

SymomWed 16 Jan 13 (02:24pm)

“.....tend to be the most Liberal. That is, they are more affluent”.

So now you need to be “affluent” to be “Liberal”!
Talk about geeralisations.
But good to see you continuing Swan’s class-warfare Peter .
Looking forward to the election are you Peter?

Ray SandersonWed 16 Jan 13 (02:27pm)

Some dodgy assumptions in some comments in recent days about Labor’s chances of winning any seats. Some people are counting New England and Lyne as Labor seats which will fall but as Mumble pointed out, these are conservative seats, probably forever. Seat of Melbourne could quite likely go back to Labor from Greens and here in Queensland the LNP is so on the nose that surely that must be a positive for Labor, similarly in Victoria where the Libs aren’t popular. Yes, I know that Fed and State issues are different but the vibe is still out there. Barring any further disasters for Gillard, IMO the election will be close as it mostly has been in the past.

sabenaWed 16 Jan 13 (02:29pm)

Peter,
Sorry I am still confused on the methadology.If the table shows personal vote as a % of the candidates vote it still comes up with wrinkles.Tony Burke is said to have a personal vote twice that of Maxine McKew,but he had a greater swing against him(9.9% on primary votes) than she did(8.2%)

Peter BrentWed 16 Jan 13 (02:41pm)

We should not expect a person with a high personal vote to suffer a smaller swing than someone with a low one. As long as they have both been in for more than a term, their personal vote is built into the vote, both before and after the swing. We can expect that when they leave their replacement will suffer. That’s what happened to the Liberals with the retirement of the popular Dana Vale in Hughes.

The swing against Burke in the portion of the seat that he was a sitting member of was 6.8 per cent and McKew’s corresponding number was 5.3 per cent. We should expect the swing against McKew to be lower because she was only elected in 2007 and so should experience a “sophomore surge” on her first outing. She goes from no personal vote in 2007 to x per cent in 2010.

(Burke’s is not twice McKew’s, as they’re both relative to some other “neutral” number.)

IanWed 16 Jan 13 (02:31pm)

Interesting choice of words in your comment “....culminating later that day in Julia Gillard’s famous “misogyny speech”. Some might say the speech was notorious rather than famous. I don’t think you come across as biased one way or another but those that do could have their prejudices strengthened by your choice of adjective. Perhaps no qualifier might be less potentially contentious

RebellionWed 16 Jan 13 (03:06pm)

Ray Sanderson
Wed 16 Jan 13 (02:27pm)

...and here in Queensland the LNP is so on the nose that surely that must be a positive for Labor, similarly in Victoria where the Libs aren’t popular.

Big call there Ray. Even though Newman has had to upset people by fixing Bligh Labor’s malfeasance and incompetence, the LNP is still leading 55-45. Hardly what you would call “on the nose”.

NicWed 16 Jan 13 (03:30pm)

“But the electoral world doesn’t revolve around Sydney’s west . . . “
Dear Peter,
You’re not allowed to say things like this; it makes everyone in Sussex Street (or possibly Barrack St Parramatta) very upset. Now repeat after me; “One seat to rule them all, one party to find them, one faction to bring them all, and in the West bind them”.

Peter BrentWed 16 Jan 13 (03:31pm)

Oi oi oi.

LogicalWed 16 Jan 13 (03:34pm)

Whatever they may say the ALP remain frightened to hold an election in any seat.

RegWed 16 Jan 13 (03:38pm)

I would suggest that both Lyne and New England are extremely important in the next election given the Newspoll 2PP numbers. The outcome of these seats could once again decide the Government. Although it has been said on numerous occasions that they are conservative seats, yet have had Independents that rarely exhibit conservative values. would hazard a guess that they are either marginal or labor biased by now. So why is there no current polling done in these two seats. Does DB know if the parties do polling in them. If they are now showing pro labor or pro National that would just about tell us who will be the victors come the poll.
I for one would like the question put to each of the incumbents, if it were a hung parliament again would your allegiance still be with Labor.

David drives a 4WD, tooWed 16 Jan 13 (03:40pm)

Ian
Wed 16 Jan 13 (02:31pm)

The word “famous” is probably less value ladened than “infamous”.

The Online dictionary simply defines a “famous person” as “a widely known person”. But infamous is defined as

1. Having an exceedingly bad reputation; notorious.
2. Causing or deserving infamy; heinous: an infamous deed.
3. Law
a. Punishable by severe measures, such as death, long imprisonment, or loss of civil rights.
b. Convicted of a crime, such as treason or felony, that carries such a punishment.

Mumble’s choice of adjective was inscrutable and therefore quite professional.

PeterMaxWed 16 Jan 13 (03:42pm)

I cannot see Gillard Labor winning the next election. Despite the very pro Labor Newspolls over the past 8 months, compared to other polls and twice recently reported internal Labor polling which was very bad for Labor.

DBWed 16 Jan 13 (04:03pm)

Reg
Wed 16 Jan 13 (03:38pm)

Based on the latest information I have which is not partilcularly current, I’d find it highly improbable that either New England or Lyne will be retained by the incumbent MPs.

I thought Windsor was an outside (albeit an unlikely) chance of holding on until Richard Torbay was preselected for the Nationals. Torbay should be able to win comfortably.

AnnieWed 16 Jan 13 (04:27pm)

Mumble, a relative in the trucking business that has Govt. contracts, have been told that the election papers for the polling booths are ready to go on the road, and it could be anytime from March on. The were told to be ready for the nod at anytime. Straight from the horses mouth Mumble, my rellie is way up the food train.

JKWed 16 Jan 13 (04:32pm)

Assuming society is becoming more affluent (proportionally), and affluent people tend to support the Liberals; then, Labor should have disappeared from the political landscape many years ago. However, Labor is still here. Therefore, they must be able to change to address changes in society. In my view, the ability to change is the key to success of a political party.
Note: the Liberals have not been forced into significant changes because society has moved in their direction ie become more affluent. [snip, sorry, mention of a topic that might start off-topic arguments]

Peter BrentWed 16 Jan 13 (05:02pm)

The United States gives a dramatic example of a changing demographic for a centre-left party.

Janey has MovedWed 16 Jan 13 (04:56pm)

“… the election papers for the polling booths are ready to go on the road”

Annie, ask your rellie who’s on the ballot for Greenway for the Libs. Tks.

DougWed 16 Jan 13 (05:02pm)

Previous comment can’t literally be true as nominations have not been called for, closed etc etc. which is AEC business nothing to do with the government. This must be a metaphor for the govt going to an early election which I don’t think is likely for a whole mass of good reasons - particularly to do with the timing of Senate elections

DBWed 16 Jan 13 (05:08pm)

Annie
Wed 16 Jan 13 (04:27pm)

I don’t doubt that for a second. Gillard will go when and if she thinks she can win the election. To this point she has not stood a chance. Her polling today indicates that she can’t win at this point, although the ALP are more competitive than they were previously in certain locations. Last year MPs such as Emerson and Swan were finished. Today, they’d probably hold on.

I suspect (particularly given this latest Newspoll) that there will be a flurry of internal polling in Feb and March from both the ALP and the Coalition. If they are favourable for Labor, Gillard will go in April, prior to the May budget. I have no doubt on that. But I suspect the thing that will continue to kill this from happening is that the Coalition primary vote remains pretty solid at around the 45% level nationally. The Coalition cannot lose with a primary vote at that level.

My expectation is that the election will be held in October (40% chance), with the next possibility being in August (30% chance) post- the May budget, with an outside chance of April (10%), should internal Labor polling indicate an election winning lead. Should polling deteriorate for Labor, they will likely hold on until November.

Post A Comment

We welcome your comments. All comments should be concise,
focus specifically on the topic for discussion and are submitted
for possible publication on the condition that they may be edited.
Comments that are derogatory toward the blogger or at other comments,
or those which may potentially incite racial hatred or violence,
are defamatory or in contempt of court, will not be published.
Please provide a screen name and
suburb/location - these will be published
.
We also require a working email address - not for publication,
but for verification.

* Required fields

Screen Name:* Required

Location:

Email Address:* Required

Your Comments:* Required

Email To A Friend

* Required fields

Subject:* Required

Recipient's Email:* Required

Your Name:* Required

Your Email:* Required

Your Email:* Required

Information provided on this page will not be used for any other purpose
than to notify the recipient of the article you have chosen.

Share This Article

From here you can use the Social Web links to save 'Western Sydney on the move' to a social
bookmarking site.

Peter Brent

Peter Brent started Mumble in 2001; the old site can be found at http://mumble.com.au. He mainly goes on about the numbers in electoral behaviour and voters' motivations that drive them. In 2009 he finished a PhD in political science which dealt with electoral administration, a topic he also sometimes goes on about. You can follow him on Twitter at @mumbletwits.